Which Way Ethiopia: Revolution, Civil War, or National Reconciliation? (Messay Kebede, PhD)

Since the death of Prime Minister Meles, the political situation of Ethiopia has entered a phase of uncertainty with no clear momentum toward stabilization. Despite predictions of the imminent collapse of the EPRDF, either under the pressure of a popular uprising or splits within its ranks, the political situation shows no sign of heightened challenge to the regime. In fact, it remains a mystery that no political upheavals of any importance occurred following the death of Meles, who was after all the center and the driving force of the whole system. On the other hand, however, notwithstanding an orderly succession, the uncertainty has not been removed and symptoms of unresolved internal conflicts transpire occasionally. Above all, the extent to which the new prime minister is really in charge being anything but assured, the vacillation of the system lingers, given that the entire government was designed to function under the leadership of a strong and unchallenged prime minister.

One thing is sure: the uncertainty cannot go on indefinitely and nothing can be done to improve the political climate and the economic conditions of the country without some reforms. This is to say that change is inevitable and that it will come sooner or later. The question is: which direction is the change likely to take? For my part, I have no desire to play the game of predictions. Instead, I want to present some possible scenarios and invite political leaders and activists who care about Ethiopia to reflect on them so as to be ready for various eventualities instead of being fixated on the outcome that they long for.

Given the amplifying state of frustration of the county, the only way of avoiding ominous developments is not only that the prime minister really exercises power, but that he uses this power to correct some of the glaring derailments of Meles, especially by easing the repressive policy adopted by him. Meles effected the reversal of democratization because he could count on the complete obedience of the repressive machine of the state. Haile Mariam does not have the same control and cannot have it without further empowering the very men who command the repressive apparatuses. In other words, failure to promote reform is for Haile Mariam to give more power to the TPLF instead of reducing it. By contrast, the political choice of easing repression, better still, of initiating reforms reduces the importance of the repressive forces and creates momentum toward the gathering of the popular support and legitimacy that Haile Mariam needs to prevail over Meles’s old clique.

The dilemma of the prime minister is thus clear enough: in order to assert himself, he has to correct Meles’s policy, but in so doing he runs the risk of antagonizing the TPLF and hence of losing his position altogether. Conversely, if he upholds the policy of his predecessor, he simply feeds on the image of a puppet of the TPLF, which image underlines his irrelevance, thereby instigating his removal. Surely, since the longer the policy of Meles continues, the more repressive the state must become, the TPLF will be better off to do the job on its own than to use the cumbersome mediation of a puppet. The dilemma shows that Haile Mariam’s best bet is to go in the direction of easing repression, which at least promises the prospect of him becoming his own man.

The huge unknown is whether Haile Mariam has the right political ambition to want to stand by himself and the political skill to outmaneuver the TPLF and other challengers. I must admit that I have no a ready answer for this question. I also confess my pessimism, even though I recognize that more time is needed before one makes a final judgment. True, I am encouraged by his open condemnation of the displacement of the Amhara settlers, but remain skeptical because of the lack of any practical follow-up to correct the injustice.

Moreover, the appalling dismissal of the appeals of Eskinder Nega, Andualem Arage, and other political prisoners by the higher court did nothing to reduce my skepticism. To sum up my position, in light of the time needed for consolidation, I say that Haile Mariam still deserves the benefit of the doubt even if the performances of his government are not, so far, promising.
In case Haile Mariam remains submerged by the TPLF, the scenario of an increasingly repressive government that could only further aggrieve the Ethiopian masses presents itself. My contention is that unless the TPLF takes the rightful place of being a party among others within the coalition of the EPRDF, it cannot maintain the hegemonic role it has played so far without pushing repression to a point far exceeding that of Meles. By force of habit and because of his political shrewdness, Meles was able to rise as the unquestioned leader of the EPRDF. After successive purges of all those who could threaten him, none among the remaining leaders of the TPLF has the stature or even the capacity to command the same authority. Various competitors both within the TPLF and the EPRDF are likely to emerge with the consequence that only through increased repression can one of them prevail.

Needless to say, the pursuit and continuation of the hegemony of the TPLF can only exasperate popular frustration and multiply opposition. Though arrogance inspires the TPLF to think that repression is enough to protect its supremacy, the history of all countries teaches us that a time comes when people rise and confront what repressive them, regardless of the apparent strength of the repressive state. Ethiopia is not going to be an exception to the rule. Hence, my belief that the continuation of the hegemony of the TPLF will inevitably lead to an uprising. The burning question is: will the uprising take the form of a revolution or of an outright civil war?

All those Ethiopians who still hope that Ethiopia will be galvanized by the Arab spring have in mind an uprising leading to revolution, which would essentially consist in the overthrow of the TPLF state and the dismantling of its repressive apparatuses. This outcome appears even more likely in light of the fact that Ethiopia has already gone through a similar process in 1974. For many activists, revolution is the best prospect for Ethiopia and its people, with the hope that this time the mistakes of the 70s will not be committed and the revolution will establish a democratic state.

Here I hasten to express my reservation, which originates from the simple observation that the situation in 1974 was quite different from what Ethiopia is facing today. Indeed, if a reference to the Arab spring is of some use, I will say that what lies ahead is a development that is similar neither to Egypt nor Tunisia. The model we should refer to is that of Libya or, even more correctly, that of Syria. In other words, the likely outcome of a total uprising in Ethiopia is civil war rather than revolution.

What this means is that conflicts and violent clashes will develop, not between a dictatorial state and everybody else, but between a majority and a dictatorial state identifying with the interests of a minority ethnic group. For one of the detrimental results of the ethnicization of the Ethiopian society and the creation of ethnic regions is the clear divide between ethnic groups and the subsequent subsumption of these groups to the privileges and special treatments of local elites. In a situation of wide uprising, the point is easily reached when it becomes difficult to distinguish between the elites and the ethnic groups, which is then a recipe for ethnic confrontations, that is, for civil war.

Though I never endorse the idea that similar conditions entail similar historical outcomes, it would be foolish to think that regularities in history do not operate in some degree. Among the Arab countries that went through a political turmoil, Syria is the one that comes close to the situation of Ethiopia under the TPLF. The bloody conflict in Syria is between the Alawi minority, which controls economic and military apparatuses, and a frustrated majority that is politically and economically marginalized by a dictatorial state serving the interests of the minority. The uprising against Assad and the state failed to be revolution and turned into a civil war because of the fear of the minority that the overthrow of Assad will mean the loss of its political and economic upper hand, not to mention the fear of physical victimization. Even if many in the minority resent the dictatorial rule of Assad, they prefer to stick with him to avoid the likelihood of revengeful treatments.

No one can honestly say that Ethiopia under the TPLF does not show a deepening rift between the majority and the minority ethnic group allegedly represented by the existing regime. Doubtless, some supporters of the regime will argue that the EPRDF is a coalition of different ethnic groups so that Ethiopia is not under a minority rule. But the image of the EPRDF as a coalition of equals fools no one anymore and members of the EPRDF know perfectly well that they are clients of the TPLF, not to say hired mercenaries. The TPLF federation is a smoke screen: not only the major economic assets and the governments of ethnic regions are controlled by the TPLF, but most importantly, the repressive apparatuses, including the higher echelons of the army, are entirely dominated by officers of Tigrean origin.

One condition for a popular uprising to avoid a descent into a civil war is when the army is either paralyzed by divisions or stays neutral. This precipitates the fall of the regime and hence precludes the transformation of revolution into civil war. This was clearly the case in Egypt and Tunisia. But when the army supports the regime against the people in order to perpetuate ethnic domination, the fight is prolonged with the risk of turning into a civil war. In the case of Ethiopia, to maintain that the army will remain neutral if an uprising occurs is little credible. In the 1974 revolution, the regime was overthrown easily because the army did not support it. It was a multiethnic army and as such was not committed to the defense of any particular ethnic group. What Ethiopia has now is not so much a national as an ethnic army, which is then most likely to defend the ruling ethnic elite, thereby pushing the uprising toward a civil war.

While agreeing that the worst outcome would be the beginning of a civil war, most Ethiopians comfort themselves by believing that it is very unlikely. But who said that the worst scenario is unlikely to happen? Accordingly, what we need is realism, that is, a clear and unbiased assessment of the situation so that we can work toward making the worst scenario improbable. Stated otherwise, we should develop a policy of prevention, which is none other than the framing of a government of national reconciliation. Such a government requires crucial concessions from those who control power as well as from those who oppose them. When a country is beset with political problems that are deep and potentially liable to degenerate into armed confrontations, the solution cannot come from the organization of democratic elections. The latter require some degree of consensus and a minimum of impartial arbitration that are inexistent in ethnically polarized countries.

As shown by elections since 2005, the minimum conditions for a democratically elected government do not exist in Ethiopia and are not likely to appear any time soon. The ruling party will do everything to win, including the use of violence and fraudulent manipulations of votes; the opposition will continue to complain without any notable change. Let us admit it, in countries deeply polarized by ethnic or religious issues, where therefore the rule of the minority abiding by the verdict of the majority is not recognized, elections are just powerless to bring about political change.

This does not mean that democratic elections should be abandoned altogether. It simply means that a transitional period, during which mutual confidence, consensus, and healing can be worked out, is necessary. The purpose of a government of national reconciliation is to create the conditions for the establishment of a political system emanating from democratic elections. As a precondition for democracy, such a government is not itself ruled by democratic principles. Rather, its ruling principle is pragmatism: it takes measures from the sole perspective of reconstructing national harmony and consensus, without being disturbed by questions of principles and morality. Its main goal is the provision of incentives for political opponents to come together and establish consensus on some basic issues.

Such reconciliation is based on the premise that a civil war would benefit nobody. From this shared agreement follows the need to take decisive actions to avoid what everybody wants to avoid, the whole purpose being to reach a working mechanism assuring a win-win solution for everybody. Concessions from all competing parties are the ingredients driving the whole process. As such, the process abhors extremisms of all kinds so as to bring about the rule of moderation.

Just as the ruling party agrees to share power with the opponents, so too the opponents give up all political vendetta and victimization. This is an important provision: since what prevents members of the ruling party from playing by the rule of democracy is the fear of reprisal against their person and their economic assets, offering an amnesty and a guarantee against economic dispossession is alone liable to institute confidence and reciprocity. For those who argue, in the name of justice, that crimes must be exposed and punished, my answer is that forgiveness and amnesty are morally justified if they allow us to reach the greater good of reconciliation, national unity, and peace.

Some such process of transition could be undertaken under the leadership of Prime Minister Haile Mariam. His weak political position, combined with the lack of extremism and the fact that he represents a minority ethnic group that can serve as a buffer between larger competing groups, gives him a strategic political role. It is to this go-between role that he owes his position as prime minister. To complete his mediating role, which is then his calling, he must now call upon the opposition and place himself between the EPRDF and the opposition and promote the idea of a government of national reconciliation. In so doing, he turns his strategic importance into the legitimacy of a nation-builder.

This is the best exit strategy for EPRDF and the best way to transfer power with out blood shed. It is a win-win strategy that will bring change to our country. It is the fear of losing their economic power that force them to cling on power. Let them have whatever they got, it is their blood money for fighting almost all of their youth age. Thank you Dr. Messay for your thoughtful advice.

You said “Which Way Ethiopia: Revolution, Civil War, or National Reconciliation?”
Dr know it all, It only strain common to understand where Ethiopia is exactly now. Ethiopia refuses either of your hypothesis.
I believe you didn’t think twice when you write this trash or you might have missed your anti psychotic pills.
There are no gimmicks, Ethiopia is one of the most stable East African countries who brought an amazing growth and development. You might have a lot of political grievance but there should be at any stance you would come with this rubbish conclusion. I am afraid that you have the faculty to think or you might be suffering from premature dementia compounded with psychosis to give a wrong picture to you readers.

In the first place, Ethiopia has already passed a deadly revolution. CIVIL WAR you are talking about….I think has ended 20 plus years ago.
RECONCILIATION..No reconciliation with chauvinistic political parties.
…..OR ARE you demanding to watch this dreadful events as a reply like a foot ball game.
You are simply good for nothing professor.

Teshome pls leave ur adjectives for your personal communications and discuss on substances presented by Pr Messay. Hope you remember Mussa Imbrahim of Libya and Foolish Ali of Iraq who said no to reconciliation up to the last minute.

what some insane proffesors like this guy and mesfin dont know is the year is 2013 not 2005 and 90% of ethiopians now like eprdf except sick diaspora who are racist still think tigre rules .thats not true there is constitution and it works why dont you infidels come and see .we dont want any any any any diaspora ‘politician’ to speak on our behalf forget us we forget you ethiopia is not your toy if not we are ready to sacrifice against you.down with diaspora!!!!death to diaspora!!!!

Dr. Messay, with due respect, I disagree with some of your points. I would like also to apologize beforehand for the strong words that I will use in my comment. This is because I don’t find suitable alternative words that explain it more.
I was also expecting you to add more scenarios regardless of their probability of happening (I even bet some of them have greater probability than yours). Here are additions to your scenarios, which may help you open your eyes and analyze the situation with honesty rather arrogance, hate, and extremism.
1. Lovely scenarios
a) The government reforms its policies that may lead to more equitable and enabling playing field and the opposition wins (of course this scenario assumes the opposition are better than the ruling party…..God knows it…).
b) The Party reforms its policies and coupled with emerging young EPRDF elites, it buys the heart of majority Ethiopians and stays in power for many years to come.
In one way or the other, both scenarios could result fundamental reformation of exiting institutions and establishment of new ones that could buy the confidence of majority of Ethiopians.
2. Ugly scenarios
a) The government stays without reform, even increase its repression. I expect it can live at least for the next 15-20 year. Then, the key figures will get retired or dead. This gives the new young EPRDFiets to take the opportunity to reform policies.
b) Let me borrow your assumption that revolution leads to civil war (Ethiopian context). You took for granted that the civil war would be between Tigrians and non Tigriants. That shows how your prediction terribly got wrong (of course it also shows your wishful thinking and arrogance). I would rather take for granted that the civil war would be between cardes(regardless of their ethnic background, be it in the police or military) and those who are convinced of the need for change ( the general people, including those in the police and military).
c) I will again borrow your assumption (revolution-civil war). This could lead to secession of many ethnic regions (I expect ethno-centric elites from Tigray, Oromia, and Somalia would use this opportunity to secede).
d) Again with revolution-war, as has been seen in Syria, this invites neighboring countries to participate in it by supporting more or less of the others. I expect Eritrea would take the opportunity to make sure there will never be a strong and united Ethiopia. In doing so, they may support the ethno-centric elites of Tigray, Somalia, and Oromia as the final outcome deletes the notion of ‘tiny’ country.
In one way or another, these scenarios would darken our hopes and may be ‘undo’ everything ‘us’.
You really don’t know Ethiopia, may be you forgot it… 🙂
3. May God/Allah help us!!
In one or another Ethiopia would continue to be strong and united with exemplary democracy and development. In light of this, we got what we want with no/little loss.

I am sure he has thought about these scenarios, but chose not to discuss them because they have a potential of dissuading many people from participating in such actions that bring about revolution/ civil war, with worse eventualities in store.

To the so called professors and Doctors in the diaspora who don’t know Ethiopia except in the extremist medias of the diaspora, please leave Ethiopia alone. There are of course some problems in Ethiopia, but they don’t want your twisted mind and good-for-nothing education to self them. Please keep away from Ethiopia.

Dear all, all of the disappointing comments for our highly educated Messay Kebede (PhD) aren’t mine. It is his own students who said that & if you can find positive comments about him, please let us know it.

Some of User Comments For Professor Messay Kebede (PhD)

ASI 374
He tries too hard to push his views onto you and doesn’t take into account that you may see it from another spot. He’s from Africa and has a strong accent that makes it difficult to understand everything without trying pretty hard to pay attention, class was painfully boring.

ASI374
Sounds like he’s on an oxygen tank, spoon feeds the readings, couldn’t read one of his comments, & when asked him what he wrote, he couldn’t read his own handwriting.

PHL103
No. Just no

PHL358
He is aweful. He has a very heavy accent and hard to understand. There is no structure to the class and its impossible to study for tests. Also when you get your test back his you can’t even understand his comments because his handwriting is so awful.

PHL103
I would avoid this teacher if you can. He is not monotoned, but he still manages to make every class incredibly dull. Everything is lectured and he has only a few quizzes, but he is not an easy grader. This class will put you to sleep.

phil110
The most boaring and a very unintrested prof ever. I wish he at least appear intrested to teach, He seems someone is frocing him to live in Ameria and teach.

HIST101
This Professor is very vague in his lecture, he speaks for himself has no contact with students. I wonder how he was teaching in his home country. A survey and review of his background as a teacher is importnat.

phl103
Kebede is difficult to understand, lectures constantly and is relatively a pain as a prof. I am actually sitting in his class at the moment… and he just reads from the packets/handouts that he sends out… read the packets as much as you can and you might be ok.

Selamawit, he is an elder; in our culture it is morally mandatory to respect people. Prof. Messay is what he is and we can not do anything about it. We all have our own limitations including the Prof. I suggest class room matters remain in class rooms. It is not good to violate people’s dignity and rights because we do not like them. What I am, I am, it is not my fault; I grew up in Ethiopia and it is really hard to change because we have a very suppressive culture. It is not our fault; it is the fault of the systems we lived and born in. That is why we were condemning Mr. Abebe Gelaw for abusing Meles Zenawi because he did not like him. You do not insult or degrade people because you do not like them. So Salamawit, you did google and found out the weak link of Prof. Messay and using it to attack him? No human is perfect or without limitation. One big problem among Ethiopians, we never listen. Anways, please respect people for who they are despite their opinions.

This does not mean I endorse violence. We must reject violence and embrace civilization. Violence is for stone age people. This is 21 century. We do not need violence to solve our problems.

I am sure he has thought about these scenarios, but chose not to discuss them because they have a potential of dissuading many people from participating in such actions that bring about revolution/ civil war, with worse eventualities in store.

Professor Messay Kebede, the fanatic Derg high level blue uniform wearing cadre who now lives in exile in the USA and spews out, time and again, vitriolic attacks.

The philosophy professor Messay Kebede in one of his writing has proclaimed that in order to bring democracy to Ethiopia, EPRDF has to be deposed through violent means. Would you expect that kind of teaching from a philosopher?

After reading that, I was curious to see what kind of professor he was. I checked on rate my professor and as I expected the majority of the students who commented said, Messay Kebede teaches like a dictator. It is ironic though that Messay kebede an advocate of democracy is actually a dictator of his classroom.

Education is useless. Want to win this argument? Choose a sample full of mesay. I always see the evils of education though the articles of this guy. Please Mesay “phd” read an article by Tecola Hagos recently and see if you can improve.

The professor never learns even from his own mistakes. The one time Mengistu’s ideological right-hand man needs to sober up and read his own convoluted articles he published over the years.

He is not contributing for the democratic struggle. I wish he and his former ESEPA comrades retire and leave the political stage for those who have political credibility in their quest for justice and rule of law. It is a pity that we even chat about his writings.

Trying to appease woyanes is tantamount to trying to tame a serpent or like trying to domesticated a hyena. Woyanes are subhumans who don’t understand reconcilation.
Your article conclusion is just a wishfull thinking. It is not gonna happen. The only solution is public uprising.

Can you all Ethiopian PHDS leave your title when you articles? We know you are PHDS. Just leave your PSHDS. I can assure we Ethiopians so so backward. Check out how Ethiopians run thier only injera business restraunt. Most Ethiopians are not even able to do any business outside Ethiopia part from Taxi related job and apart from those elite amhara officials who left through bole long ago, like Almariam. Why are not Ethiopians able to do any other business except driving taxis and poliitics of woyane woyane rally across Europe, and USA? I am disappoiinted men. The restraunts low standards. Some of them they do not have toilets; I think they still live in Ethiopians villages and not able to upgrade themselves. They never sell anything except Injera. They also say they have unique natural or real Ethiopian restraunt, but when you go in, what u find is rice injera? oh my God? The amhara elites rule of 100 years really made us the dumbest people on earth. What is wrong with us guys? do we know anything except war, hate? Anyway, you can not teach an old dog a new trick. you can not repair an adult. You can only repair a child. Older Ethiopians are gone forever. On the last breath of life will change them. While people are living stone ages, our PHDS are campaigning to stop the Dam of Nile? Are these even human? what the fuck Ethiopia if its people are abusive, killer, rapist, arrogant, ignorant, uncivilized ? what I am going to do with Ethiopia whether it is ruled by Dr. Berhanu or by Dr. Messay Kebede? The illness of only my way is the incurable illness.

I would like to thank you to our dear brother Messay kebede for his contribution and also inviting everybody to this discussion. I really share most of his opinon and intelectual analysis on the subject. but, my view is different when it comes to justic.
I say, we all must have to work hard in order Justic to prevail in our Country by all cost !

I found your article not original. In fact very apologetic at best and alarmist at worst. With your kind of expertise and extensive involvement in the nitty gritty of Ethiopian politics, this piece is more in its head liner broad strokes and less about the Ethiopian people at large. I do not read the ETHIOPIAN PEOPL,only reduced in their ethnic identity by ethnic politics by the master tribe. All your analysis is top-down-statism. The original sin-STATE POWER.All you scribes stems from the point of view of power politics you so familiar and an expert adviser from afar to the very despotic politcal system by rearranging the deck of the political card to smooth or avoid disaster to the power holders.You could have develop and write with dispassionate discourse the the probable scenario without invoking fear and unrelated secniore like comparing Ethiopian society with Syrian society as starkly different as Egypt or keya or Sudan etc… This is very amateurish and end up personal opinion which does express your wish and fears as a political opinion not scholarly outcome based on empirical evidence prevails in our beloved homeland ,Ethiopia. I hope Prof. you employ your vast knowledge and expertise with out being political and shifting and wavering positions.Stay out of punditry. Otherwise you will be like many of of us who just go with the wind.

====
a transitional government of hodgepodge political imbeciles, an attempt at dilution of one form over the other has as much likelihood of creating a civil war.
======
the most likely civil war, by the shear number of weaponry presence and logistical ease is bound to happen in the north.
========
IMO, this article and the discussions of this weekend will fade away starting Monday, with the government perhaps making a few adjustments on items that it deems are of apparent danger to it immediately.
=======
geo-political ethiopia of the habashit making has been tired, re-tired, re-fried many many many times and has both in analysis and actual fact on the ground repeatedly failed to materialize anything to the majority of the people in the south and has not at all helped most of the people in the north. the people north to south have been mentally, physically, morally debased to a functionally illiterate “elite” who has yet to show an iota of data to claim that it actually represents what the people want.
=====================

With all due respect to Prof Messay, I beg to differ with your approach and methodology of writings in that your writings are neither substantiated by facts nor reflect the realities on the ground innEthiopia but guided by emotions and to that extent are wrongly oriented and misguided by the mentality of hate politics of the 1960’s and 1970’s.No wonder you are the product of that generation. From what I observed and followed from your writings, much should not be expected as you are not using your intellectual faculty to analyze the contemporary Ethiopian politics but your personal motives and intentions from a fixed premises and narrow perspective of dismissive politics. That is why I do not see theoretical as well as conceptual arguments and reasons nor empirical evidences in your articles to prove or disprove the political system and policies exercised back home right or wrong. Policy is about choice and not about wishes. Do not undermine the wisdom of the Ethiopian people. They know there interests. They differentiate the good from the bad. Today they do not need a patron. They now their rights and obligations and they now their sovereign right to vote in or vote out their elected governments. Do not make the mistake of intellectual arrogance and elite chauvinism to assume that the Ethiopian people are ignorant of their needs and aspirations. There is no way that the Ethiopian peoples are going back on self determination and self-administration and group rights. Gone are the old days of injustice and inequality and denail of the identity of the Ethiopian nations and nationalities. They know what they have achieved and did not acheive in the 22 years. Fore sure, they know how far they have travelled in terms of peace, development and democracy and good governance. They also know the distance that they have to cover to achieve, the ideals of Ethiopian renaissance. They know thatnthey aare on the right path and own policies that are yielding results and bearing fruits. They also know the strength of EPRDF as they do know its weakness. They know when it is right and when it is wrong. They appreciate when it is right and criticize when it is wrong. Take it from them, they are well aware of that EPRDF’s strength out weighs its weakness. It is not because of fear or ignorance they elect it again and again. No they elect it because they know well that it serves their interest and endeavors to fulfill their aspirations and ambitions. If that were not the case, they know the weapon they possess and will not hesitate to make a different choice. Your scenarios will not have place in today’s Ethiopia. Time will tell!